Jump to content


HadIt.com Elder
  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Berta last won the day on October 21

Berta had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,457 Excellent

About Berta

  • Rank
    HadIt.com Elder/SVR Radio Panelist

Profile Information

  • Military Rank
    PLEASE post questions in the main Forums
  • Location
    Beautiful hills of NY andwidow of  2 vets, 2 HD each and mother of USAF vet-my daughter, 7 years Top Secret Intel
  • Interests
    tactical warfare student- AMU
    Oriental home design
    organic cleaning tips
    Capt Adoph Von Shell-interested in any info at all!
    German Commander (WWI)lectured to the US Army after the war on warfare-- PTSD - tactics etc-and Leadership
    The Pullers-Chesty and Lewis (USMC)
    chocolate brownies
    anything at all regarding Vietnam
    the failure of the Maginot Line (WWII)
    Trench warfare
    anything amphibious

    Led Zepplin, Bob Dylan, Sting, Al Green, Mozart, Classical guitar,Moog synthesizer, Eminem,Janis Joplin,
    Michael Jackson, Teddy Pendergast, Mongo Santamaria,
    Cal Tjader, Miles Davis, AmerIndian battle chants,
    Hendrix,etc etc etc
    Pho and nuc mam dinners

Recent Profile Visitors

32,863 profile views
  1. Indeed it does-nothing would surprise me at all, if this med is causing major secondary effects to vets. I read somewhere that it should not be taken if a vet is also taking psychotropic meds.
  2. Yes- or course, You are right Vync-yes the ssme department should handle how a vet responds to that question and I think the vet should respond by using the CUE regulations, as to how the committed the error. I wrote to former Sec Shulkin and his liaison called me from DC and told me that he did use my suggestions and one is the fact that the decisions should be searched for CUE before they are mailed out.I didnt realize this was a question on the HRL form. Those regs and the other rreg I had changed is here somewhere. Secretary Shulkin has written a book- it isn't out yet but I pre ordered it- https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/david-shulkin-book-veterans-affairs/index.html In part : "Former Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin says in a new book he was shocked by an apparent culture of backstabbing in Washington and specifically his own department -- and that veterans are paying the price, The Washington Post reported Friday." I think people think I am nuts but I am convinced that VA has a "deep state "affecting practically every dept. in the VA.On the older vet boards , pre internet, we called it the 'old boys club' but now it is the 'old boys and girls' club- those who are determined to keep the status quo and the power they have over veterans ( and VA employees as well)- Most of the best individuals I have ever met work at or did work at the VA. Their hard work and dedication is compromised by the people employed there at every level, who could care less about vets. Being around VA myself for decades, at least 4 or 5 Secretary's did respond to letters I had sent them on various issues. Sec Wilkie did not respond but I am glad I wrote to him anyhow re: AO and HBP I feel that Travelgate thing that caused Sec Shulkin to get canned , was a set up-because he was doing a lot for vets as far as their medical care went and was in tune I feel to what the average veteran claimant goes through with the VA. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/david-shulkin-book-veterans-affairs/index.html "Former Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin says in a new book he was shocked by an apparent culture of backstabbing in Washington and specifically his own department -- and that veterans are paying the price, The Washington Post reported Friday." and "The VA was once thought to be the only part of the federal government that was above politics," Shulkin writes in his book, titled, "It Shouldn't Be This Hard to Serve Your Country," according to the Post. But "the environment in Washington had grown so toxic, chaotic and subversive that it became impossible for me to accomplish the important work that our veterans need and deserve." https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/18/politics/david-shulkin-book-veterans-affairs/index.html I do believe it was entirely his own department ( the VA-which got worse after they became a Cabinet department years ago ,that he bases his book on. I do believe there is a deep state in VHA as well as VBA because although VA has tried t do many positive things, they seem to take two steps backward for every step forward. This Press Release I got this AM shows what I mean: "" VA announces new process for responding to Privacy Act requests 10/21/2019 10:02 AM EDT The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) implemented a new process Oct. 1 for responding to Privacy Act requests from claimants received by the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) for access to their claims files." But when I clicked on that link above, the VA link does not tell us what the new process will be.
  3. Bumping this up ,to make this point, I made here somewhere but don't have time to find it- If you feel you definitely have a valid CUE , in a recent decision, a CUE that you know conforms to what a CUE is, by reading the many articles here on CUE- I suggest to definitely file the CUE prior to filing a NOD. ASAP. Make your calendar when the NOD deadline gets close and file it ,if you have had no input on the CUE ,but but give them a few months (one or two)to see if they will handle the CUE claim.My point is I have experienced ( others here as well) very fast decision on CUEs the VA made, when the CUE claim was filed right away and produced a good argument ,as to the legal error (s) they committed and also as to how their CUE was detrimental to you- and that can stave off, in many cases, the very need for a NOD,if their CUE decision satisfies what the claim was for. As you know the VA seeks CUE right away during the Higher Level Review- but we cannot really cont on that so if they do commit CUE in a recent decision, whip your CUE out to them ASAP! There was no good reason for my RO to hold my SMC CUE for 8 years.When my AO IHD death claim went to a different VARO, hen it got awarded. The problem was my RO tried to make up a regulation to deny, plus did ll sorts of thiing to make me think it was being worked on, like at one point they said it was with a 'specialist'-I think the 'specialist ' was the same guy who replaces their burned out light bulbs and/or fills their toilet tissue dispensers. I cannot imagine the crap their extensive review of my C file ( in progress) will reveal. I still have their ludicrous initial decisions, and my C file, unlike my dead husband's C file , is quite large and all about many battles over 2 decades, that they ultimately failed to win- but it also reveals how the VA can and will victimize us widows.They don't discriminate- they put many of you veterans through this utter senseless BS as well.
  4. There have been some Burn pit awards at the BVA: In part: "The Veteran contends that his trachea cancer is related to active service, specifically as a result of in-service exposure to burn pits while in combat in Iraq. The medical evidence is in relative equipoise as to whether this disability is related to service. On the one hand, Dr. H. G., the Veteran’s thoracic surgeon, confirmed in March 2017 that the Veteran had been diagnosed as having trachea cancer which required surgical removal (performed by Dr. H. G. earlier that same month in March 2017), post-surgical radiation treatment, and resulted in vocal cord paralysis. Although Dr. H. G. acknowledged in his opinion that no specific cause for trachea cancer had been identified in the general population based on the small number of cases seen, he noted that environmental exposure could not be excluded as a cause. Critically, Dr. H. G. opined that, based on the Veteran’s “unusual individual exposure,” it was as likely as not that the Veteran’s in-service exposure to burn pits while in Iraq caused or contributed to his trachea cancer. On the other hand, the VA examiner subsequently opined in May 2017 that it was less likely than not that the Veteran’s in-service exposure to burn pits in Iraq caused or contributed to his trachea cancer. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the Board concludes that the record evidence sufficiently supports finding that the Veteran’s trachea cancer is related to his in-service exposure to burn pits while in combat in Iraq. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304. In summary, the Board finds that service connection for trachea cancer, including as due to in-service exposure to burn pits, is warranted." https://www.va.gov/vetapp19/files4/19128164.txt and in part: “The Veteran has claimed entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, sleep apnea, and shortness of breath. He also claims service connection for memory loss to include as related to the sleep apnea. One of the Veteran's theories of entitlement is that the disorders were caused by his exposure to smoke from a burn pit in Balad Air Base during his active service in 2005. He maintains that associated symptoms began following that period of active service. As explained by a Bioenvironmental Engineering Flight Commander in a December 2006 risk assessment memorandum pertaining to the burn pits at Balad Air Base, Iraq, the smoke hazards were associated with burning: plastics, Styrofoam, paper, wood, rubber, POL (petroleum, oil, lubricants) products, non-medical waste, some metals, some chemicals (paints, solvents, etcetera) and incomplete combustion products. The author of the memorandum noted that the solid wastes burned contain materials that can create hazardous compounds, and noted that a list of possible contaminants included: acetaldehyde, acrolein, arsenic, benzene, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, dichlorofluoromethane, ethylbenzene, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen fluoride, various metals, nitrogen dioxide, phosgene, sulfuric acid, sulfur dioxide. The author noted that many of these chemical compounds had been found during past air sampling. The author opined that there was an acute health hazard and the possibility for chronic disorder health hazards associated with the smoke. In addition, given the nature of the Veteran's active service in 2005 in Southwest Asia, provisions of specific legislation enacted to assist veterans of the Persian Gulf War, are applicable regarding symptoms of any undiagnosed illnesses. Under the provisions of specific legislation enacted to assist veterans of the Persian Gulf War, service connection may be established for a qualifying chronic disability which became manifest either during active service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War or to a degree of 10 percent or more not later than December 31, 2011. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1117; 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(a)(1)(i).” “ORDER Service connection for rhinitis is granted. A disability rating of 30 percent for gastroesophageal reflux disease since January 11, 2010 is granted, subject to the statutes and regulations governing the payment of monetary awards.” Other disabilities were on remand. I dont think the GERD was attributed to burn pits but the rhinitis was. https://www.va.gov/vetapp15/files4/1532266.txt The Balad Iraq assessment could potentially help other vets- and maybe there have been more assessments ,available on the net.
  5. I am glad I re read . You said: "Also, the VA examiner's medical clinical specialty is Pediatric Emergency Medicine. " That does not show me they have the expertise o opine on your issue at all. But you also said: "Dr. IMO (Board-certified Anesthesiology and Pain Management) " and that means they might not be qualified to opine either- "Additionally have asked my back surgeon for an IMO for back damage and employability statement." Great !!! This doctor would have the most expertise.They should prepare the IMO following the IMO criteria here and add a Curriculum Vitae of their expertise. "Planning to go the Supplemental Claim route so I can add new and relevant." Good too! I had Dr Bash, a Neuro-radiologist , opine on my past diabetes mellitus death claim. He made the point in his 2 IMos ,that , as a neuro-radiologist , (who also had worked for the VA) he had read the X rays and MRIs, of "thousands" of diabetic patients , so I knew he had the expertise I needed, a It fully outweighed the C & P examiner's expertise as a Endocrinologist.
  6. Can you scan and attach here ,the denial, to include the evidence list? (Cover your C file # , name, address ,prior to scanning it.) It seem they did consider the IMO you had sent to them , so no 38 CFR 4.6 CUE there- but we need to see how they considered this IMO in the decision itself. Did the IMO doctor fully adhere to the key points in the IMO/IME criteria here at hadit? "FACT 4: Favorable Findings of the Rating Decision: - Private examination for Dr. IMO (Board-certified Anesthesiology and Pain Management) opined that chronic L5-S1 disc degeneration & bilateral lower extremity sciatica are more likely than not less secondary connected (due to abnormal gait caused by service connected left ankle disability)." Is this from the recent denial? or the prior denial? I hope you do not need to do what I did many years ago-I got 2 costly IMOs but only needed one and they ignored both of them, telling my lousy VSO ,at a double DRO review that the DRO could not read them. The DRO handed them back to him and they never got into the record.I don't think he had ever seen an IMO before- his vet org (state of NY) never told vets to get them. I got the double DRO review with a CUE but was so disgusted ( I was in AMU at the time-lots of homework) that I patiently waited for the BVA to award and they did...taking note that my VCAA rights had been violated, as I had also charged in th appeal, but that none of my probative IMOs were considered at all, at the RO level.The BVA declared the VCAA violation moot ,after a brief remand, because I had sent them enough probative evidence to award. I hope you can scan and attach redacted decision and evidence list-because that is where the CUE will be if there is one. You reminded me to check something in the IMO/IME criteria here. I sent my IMO doctor ,at that time, copies of two ridiculous C & P exams the VA did posthumously, after my husband denied. IMO/IME docs need to have copies of any C & P exams that denied the claim. They hold exactly what the claim needs to overcome, medically. Also- have you googled the C & P doctor yet? They might have NO expertise at all to have even done the exam. The claim I got IMOs for was for Diabetes Mellitus- never diagnosed or treated by the VA where my husband had been a patient for many years.I already got DIC under 1151 (malpractice) but shaped this claim ( another malpracticed issue) for direct SC death. Nothing is impossible and it was the most important issue I ever had with VA. The VA C & Ps were done by an Endocrinologist, but I had studied enough Endocrinology to knock down her results myself, but this was the first time I ever had obtained an IMO and it was well worth the cost and time it saved me.I wanted to graduate with Honors, the first civilian to graduate from this Military University, and I did. I could not allow the consistent incompetence from my RO (like the consistent VA malpractice that killed my husband) interfere with my study program. Marines are Very tough teachers.This is a war college.My college work had to be Perfect.. (actually I ended up with 3 IMOs - the last one was a freebee from a former VA doctor) and II also had ordered and paid for a 4th CArdio IMO. The BVA had remanded at first for a Cardio C & P and I got a PA C & P, nocke it down myself medically, sent my lay medical opinion to the BVA, they agreed with me that it was "too speculative" and they S--t canned that opinion. The forensic firm that had the cardio doc refunded half of my fee ,when I called to tell them I had won the claim.because he had not prepared that opinion yet and the BVA award came very fast after they got my rebuttal to the PA's opinion. I knew more about cardiology than he did. The CUE, if there is one, is within the decision.
  7. Richard -Thank you for those kind words. It sounds like you have an excellent urologist! it appears that you could re file the claim, with your Deck log evidence, or appeal the denial, but it also appears to me that you could file CUE, with that evidence, and that might be the best and fastest way to go- I will prepare a tentative CUE and post it here-----might be tomorrow- ------ I did a presentation for some members of my church last Thursday which brought done very interesting results- because I mentioned my husband in the presentation and his service in Vietnam and Agent Orange. We have quite a few vets and also some adult children of vets who are serving now in my church. I was presented with contact from someone locally who might be a Blue Water Navy AO widow, but that has become a difficult situation----- Many BWN vets are dead and many either never had a VA claim or if they did, all that paperwork is probably all stuck in a box somewhere in a basement.And many widows ,even if they tried to file a DIC or accrued claim, might have given up at the first denial, long ago . The widow someone referred me to cannot use a PC and cannot recall some of the most important things that could support her claim. She was sure he was on a ship in the 7th fleet during the Vietnam War but was not sure what ship it was or what he died from .I will try to get her an appointment with the local vet reps at the VAMC, but hope she understands what she needs to get and what she should bring with her to the appointment. I hope her adult children can help her as well to find his records, and I often see this because often widows do not remember what their spouse's VA issues were , and I bet many never file a DIC and/or accrued claim, regardless of where and when the veteran''s service occurred.,, and should have.... And of all of widows claims I have seen for decades- AO or not, sometimes there is no real basis for any SC death claim at all, but VA will also consider them for a possible Wartime pension, if the deceased vet served during wartime ( regardless of where), and if the survivor's income is not too high. considering their medical expenses as well.
  8. You said: "We submitted supporting evidence about the stressor (mission logs, an article from the Marine Times and a buddy letter. Today, he got his decision and it said that the PTSD was not service connected. What are we missing? Do we need a dr to flat out say that his PTSD was caused by combat?" Did the VA list those 3 pieces of evidence in their Evidence List for the denial? Can you scan and attach their denial here? Cover his c file #, name, address prior to scanning it. Those 3 pieces of evidence should give JSRRC a clear picture of the stressor and if I were you I would ask them to verify it . I assume the article , and mission logs were specifically for his unit and that the buddy statement was also written properly. If the VA failed to consider probative evidence, you can file a CUE against them----that info is in our CUE forum- but tht depends on the wy the VA worded the decision. Do you have a copy of the C & P exam? Have you googled the doctor to see if they were qualified to do this exam. Can you scan and attach the exam here ( delete C file # and any names etc prior to scanning it )?
  9. The VA revised it's Skin condition ratings in August 2018: They are here: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=de5f9b59352fb00b3d4f85b696987ac2&mc=true&node=se38.1.4_1118&rgn=div8
  10. Also: This BVA case contains rating info for Prostate cancer: It is a long read but I know you will be willing to peruse it: The veteran had been properly given a 100% rating for 6 months , but after those 6 months the VA reduced his PC rating to “0”. They subsequently granted a 20% rating for his residuals. Unfortunately this was their decision in part- there were others claims he filed as well: “The reduction of the evaluation of the service-connected prostate cancer from 100 percent to noncompensable was proper. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for urinary frequency as a residual of prostate cancer is denied. Entitlement to SMC for loss of use of a creative organ from April 16, 2013 is granted.” By all means, if you have ED, this is a good case to read, you don’t have to tell us, but definitely claim SMC for loss of use of a creative organ.The veteran in this case had ED from the prostate surgery itself. Also the case reveals the veteran had a scar due to the prostate surgery.You could claim that as well if it fits into an area larger than the BVA found, and if it is painful or unstable. But the BVA stated: “The Veteran's scar from prostate surgery was not painful or unstable and did not have a total area greater than 39 sq. cm. “ and did not consider that specific scar anymore, in the decision. https://www.va.gov/vetapp17/files6/1734227.txt It is a long read but a very informative one. I have learned as much from BVA awards as from their denials.
  11. We have so much available to search that it took me time to find this info- the DD 149 form: https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd0149.pdf Under # 5 or 6 just put Not applicable to the injustice part and that you just want your DD214 corrected if there is more to be added to it via a DD 215 ----This is one of our many vets who had success with getting a DD 215- but as he said- send the DD 149 to the right address_ This is the most recent change I know of to contact the JSRRC -within this thread: Note the change regarding Marines: https://community.hadit.com/topic/48901-jsrrc-contact-info/
  12. That is excellent info-you are correct- This is superb: "The utter crap of PTSD is that our memory of these events is shattered into fragments. We can't remember timeframes or events or faces or sequences of events clearly. For the Vietnam guys, we suggest that they try to remember whether it was Monsoon or Dry Season. For Iraqi, try to remember if there was some event that was near your stressor like Ashura or Eid Al-Adha or Ramadan. Or if the dates were ripening. Something that could be in a season or timeframe within two months of the event." I worked in a vet center in 1983- and can only add for Vietnam vets- what was Hanoi Hanna talking about at the time? What news were you getting from the "world" ( USA)? What American songs were popular on the radio? Does you family remember what the news was stateside before your DEROS or do they still have letters from you when you were in the Nam? These are things that can narrow down the time frame. VA has told vets that JSRRC could not verify their stressors. Sometimes that is a lie. Sometimes VA wont even try to get JSRRC to verify them. The best stressor is the one most easily proven. My husband ( USMC Danang 1stMARDIV, Ops Starlight Rolling Thunder ), had Multiple stressors , many not even about all the firefights, and odd as things happened, he went to Newark NJ VA for a Business loan in 1983 and walked out with a PTSD diagnosis and the claim was filed right away by VA. He had a buddy statement from the director of the Newark VA! It was an incredible situation.I already told the full story here. The Director, also a psychiatrist , was at the scene of a horrific volunteer job the marines had to do-I think it was in the Perfume River, Vietnam and the director ,incountry himself, was called to treat many who had immediate reactions to what they had to do. Within a few months he got his SC award for "nervous condition" what they called PTSD then-at somepoint his VA med rcs changed that to PTSD. My point to add here is also, try to get the JSRRC to verify your stressor you self. Their address ( it changed a few years ago) is here under a search. I have known vets who did that and found that VA had never attempted to contact JSRRC at all. One other thing. Many vets do not have all of their medals and decorations on their DD 214- The Marines ,with my husband when my husband was being discharged, were all herded into a big room, in Quantico ? given a sheet of paper and told to list their decorations etc. They all wanted to get the hell out of there, since most of them had alredy been to Hell ( Vietnam) and none of them really knew what to put down. Scuttlebutt said his unit got the PUC ( Presidential Unit Citation) but he sure didnt put that down,, because he really didnt know it..all he knew was 26 years after his discharge ( he had filed a DD 149 available here) and a few months before he died, he got a DD 215- with the PUC and many other awards,decorations on it. If you search for the DD 149 here- make sure you put Not Applicable to the :"injustice part" and mail it to the xact address it tells you to. A corrected DD 215 can often support a stressor, because it could contain CAR, CIB, or even PUC etc to verify you were "in fear of" and "in close proximity to" hostile fire - not an exact quote , but from the 2010 PTSD regulations. And every unit has a web site these days- many even have member lists and contact info. This can help any vet from any period of service time get a buddy statement if they need one. I have an article here on what a buddy statement needs to contain. (searchable here)
  13. I think you are absolutely correct---it appeared to me that my RO (Buffalo) held back my AO IHD claim, from the Phila RO who handles widows accrued issues now, but I have filed it on the new accrued forms. The Stay could be lifted- but then again the regulations have not been published. I wonder if you are the USS Mount Katmai vet who was on the American Legion comment section. I posted our web site there many times since September, but haven't seen any BWN vet or their survivors here yet, except for you, and the lawyer at NVLSP agred with me that VA has to do a lot more to get the word out on these significant decisions ( Procopio and HR 299) You could file a CUE ! With proof of your exposure ( your deck logs) and proof that you have Prostate cancer,which VA already knows, citing HR 299 ( the link is here) as well as Procopio. Maybe the CUE would get you a faster result than appealing their denial. Still it all depends on the Stay. I was in the Gardner Moratorium ( Stay) and that caused my 1151 claim to get drawn out for many additional months, although I had already proved I fit into the Gardner decision. This is funny now but it pissed me off when it happened.... I had sent to my VARO the full settlement I had made with the USA ( under auspicesof OGC) and it was for the same charges I had made under 1151 ( wrongful death). The RO at that point had ignored all of my probate evidence for the claim, but I felt they would award based on the settlement facts, but they denied AGAIN! I was so poed I called General Counsel and got the lawyer there who settled with me- ( I always kept notes) I said" Tim this is Berta Simmons." ( He said "OH NO- You were so tough to deal with! What is wrong?"-I said 'the VA owes me more money----- because I guess your settlement papers with me have no interest toVA, and they ignored them and denied my 1151 AGAIN!" He as stunned to hear that, and either Bradshaw or Hipolet -OGC-( forget who) ordered my VARO to grant the claim! A mere few weeks went by and I got my 1151 award. As I mentioned here years ago the Philadelphia Nehmer VARO RO denied my AO IHD death claim right away, I filed CUE the very next day, and in a few weeks I got the IHD award, a SMC CUE award ( that claim had been filed in 2003 with no BVA transfer yet, and something else forget what- the decision is 46 pages long. My point is we deal with idiots at ROs sometimes. Or they are just poorly trained, or illiterate---- I recently gave the IG a full rundown on what happened to me as a AO widow( I have two DIC AO awards)and I fear this could happen to any widow of a BWN AO vet as well as AO vets who fell under Nehmer 2010 and were denied for ridiculous reasons, and might never have been advised to appeal the denial. I need to thank you Richard , for being so Well educated in the BWN AO situation! I hope the AL comment section vets and widows do join here eventually- because as our Motto here says "Knowledge is Power" so very true- and particularly since the VA ( I have had claims experiences personally now for 24 years), the VA -in many cases-does not Want us to really know Anything that can get us to a successful resolve.If VA really did do all claims correctly, we would not have been here on hadit, in existence now for almost 23 years. Thanks for telling us how recent your decision was. And for being here-I bet many BWN vets are in the same 'boat ' as you are, denied already ,with recent decisions based on the pending regulations, and don't know what to do----unfortunately we have to wait ..... I told JR ,the president of BWNVVA, as soon as HR 299 was signed, that I have been waiting for years to help with those claims---and he mentioned when I wrote the first tentative Amendment- and he said that was what- ten, 12 years ago? ( But Maybe just 8-9years ago but it seems like a lifetime.) This whole thread with your posts is Very important. NVLSP ( who won Nehmer long ago) and many vet orgs and lawyers are still telling BWN AO vets to file their claims. This is part of email from my NVLSP contact person : (Rick was my past NVLSP contact lawyer for the AO claims of 2010 regulations.) "Dear Mrs. Simmons, Thank you for your email. Rick Spataro is still at our firm, but currently works in another division. The Procopio decision and Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019 does grant retroactive disability benefits to Blue Water Veterans who served on ships within 12 nautical miles off the coast of Vietnam. However, the VA will not automatically review these veterans’ files, therefore we are encouraging all veterans and their surviving family members to submit renewed claims. The VA will review these cases after January 1, 2020." I need to add that they also need to submit any past denial of any presumptive disability, that VA denied and coded as NSC with a rating , or 'should have coded' ( Footnote One Nehmer ) for the best EED they can get. Did they give you a prostate cancer rating on the denial or maybe they never gave you a C & P exam yet.......?
  14. I read the letter from DOD - did you actually get a separate letter from DOD, sent to you, stating you were exposed to chemical agents in Khamisiyah,Iraq and you were there at that time? March 1991. The letter you posted starts out this way: "WASHINGTON, July 27, 2005 – The Defense Department is again sending letters to thousands of Gulf War veterans exposed to low levels of chemical agents contained in munitions destroyed at a weapons depot in Khamisiyah, Iraq, in March 1991." The Buddy letter, did they state they were in the same unit, same time and place where you served? Did they state their eye witness account of what chemicals you were exposed to? Did they give VA their full contact info,? as VA does often contact Buddys. I hope you can find a good doctor who will prepare an IMO for you, as that can often take some time.
  15. Hope this comes through before I lose power: "ORDER Entitlement to service connection for lung cancer due to Agent Orange exposure is granted. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer due to Agent Orange exposure is granted. Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction (ED), secondary to prostate cancer on a causation basis, is granted." In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit has stated that Veterans are entitled to 38 U.S.C. § 1116 presumptions if they served within the 12 nautical miles of the Republic of Vietnam. Procopio v. Wilkie, 913 F.3d 1371, 1380-81 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (“Congress has spoken directly to the question of whether those who served in the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of the ‘Republic of Vietnam’ are entitled to § 1116’s presumption if they meet the section’s other requirements. They are”). Based on the above evidence, the Board finds that the Veteran served in Vietnam as that term was defined by the Federal Circuit in Procopio, specifically, within the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of the ‘Republic of Vietnam’ VA’s General Counsel has indicated that some cases before the Board that were affected by the Procopio stay may be capable of immediate decision, for example if the evidence indicates that the Veteran served on board a ship that went within the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of Vietnam. General Counsel Advisory Opinion, VAOPGADVIS 1-19 (Mar. 29, 2019). For the above reasons, this is such case. See also 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(c) (“The development of evidence in connection with claims for service connection will be accomplished when deemed necessary but it should not be undertaken when evidence present is sufficient for this determination”). As the Veteran has current lung cancer and prostate cancer and he is presumed to have been exposed to Agent Orange in Vietnam, service connection for lung cancer and prostate cancer is warranted on a presumptive basis." https://www.va.gov/vetapp19/files4/19132156.txt I will find that Prec Op from OGC, they only have one other Pres Op for 2019 at their site-not related to AO and maybe that would speed up your claim ( and mine) The stay is what many vet orgs sued wilkie over to include BWNVVA. Mybe the BVA could give me a copy.
  • Create New...

Important Information

{terms] and Guidelines